Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 16:33:19 +0100 From: Stuart Henderson <stuart@eclipse.net.uk> To: Chris Shenton <cshenton@uucom.com> Cc: Barrett Richardson <barrett@phoenix.aye.net>, Steve Hovey <shovey@buffnet.net>, Mitch Vincent <cygone@zoomnet.net>, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Loadbalance webservers Message-ID: <37B197BF.97C095B0@eclipse.net.uk> References: <Pine.BSF.4.01.9908030955260.2994-100000@phoenix.aye.net> <lfd7wul96w.fsf@Samizdat.uucom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> So the multiple records are a bit of a hack Yep, > and will hose you if one of the servers dies. Not really - most web browsers, proxies and telnets cycle through until they find one that answers. Round robin DNS is in common enough usage that it is quite well supported by client software. (Also, bind will randomise the order and puts local networks first). > It would be way cool to modify the server-based daemon to have it > determine the network distance/cost to the *client* then feed that to > the lbnamed so it could return a record corresponding to the server > fastest/closest to the actual client. This would implement WAN load > balancing much like F5 Lab's $27K (each) 3DNS. I think Netscape used to do this in software (at least I always used to get the IP address of their UK mirror returned) but they seem not to be doing that now. Stuart To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37B197BF.97C095B0>